Importance of the Citizenship

[Ursus]

... but back to the original topic ...

 

The citizen/non-citizen distinction lost much of its significance in the course of the Principate. At first Roman citizens, at any rate those residing in the city of Rome, remained in possession of at least the vestiges of rights they had enjoyed under the Republic, and the benefits that accrued from empire. Gradually the exclusivity on which privledges were based was lost, as the citizen body grew to incorporate provincials, a development culminating in Caracalla's grant of citizenship to virtually all free inhabitants of the empire in AD 212. As the distinction between victor and conquered disappeared, the legal divisions within the population tended to be overshadowed by social divisons based on the elite systems of values. The result was the emergence by the reign of Hadrian of the formal distinction between the elite and the humble masses (honestiores and humiliores). The privledged honestiores included the three aristocratic orders and veterans, rewarded for their service in protecting the social order. The remainder of the free population feel into the category of humiliores ....

 

Garnsey & Saller. The Roman Empire

 

 

Thus, under the Republic the distinction between citizen and non may have been critical.

But after Augustus it gradually lessened in importance until Caracalla made it irrelevant.

[Northern Neil]

I think that one thing universal citizenship did was to give the auxilia parity of esteem with the legions. There was now no social difference between the two... probably another reason why Gibbon regarded this period as the start of the 'decline'.

[Pertinax]

I think that one thing universal citizenship did was to give the auxilia parity of esteem with the legions. There was now no social difference between the two... probably another reason why Gibbon regarded this period as the start of the 'decline'.

Id be interested to know if those who are military experts can relate any change in combat techniques (ie: auxiliae as lighter armed/versus "standard" heavy trooper citizen ) , or if a change in proportionate usage of these arms is reflected in the political change? The comment about Mons Graupius springs to mind "no Roman blood was spilt" ie: no citizens blood, (though tactically the victory was a "textbook" fire discipline operation). I know this is early conquest contact but the Auxilliae/Legion relationship is well illustrated.

 

I assume those who cite Caracalla suggest political opportunism by a poor Emperor to build a tax base and a "popular" culture of support? That is poularity versus actual efficiency.